By Colton McAllister, State Politics Reporter

California Attorney General Rob Bonta and Secretary of State Shirley Weber have filed a lawsuit seeking to block Shasta County’s voter-approved Measure B, which would ban most mail-in ballots, require hand counting of ballots, and mandate photo identification for voter registration and in-person voting.

The lawsuit, filed Friday in the Third District Court of Appeal, argues that the measure, which passed with approximately 55% of the vote last week, violates state election law and attempts to create a separate county voting system. Bonta called the measure “legally indefensible,” stating that no city or county can unilaterally rewrite state election rules.

Shasta County Clerk Clint Curtis, a Republican who backed the initiative and recently lost his bid for reelection, has maintained that the changes are lawful under the county’s charter authority. Proponents have said the measure aims to strengthen election integrity.

The legal action comes amid ongoing public questions about California’s own election processes. The state’s official canvass period allows counties up to 30 days to finalize results after Election Day. During this time, provisional ballots, late-arriving mail ballots, and other categories are processed and counted. Critics have long pointed to this extended timeline as a source of uncertainty, particularly when contrasted with faster systems elsewhere.

Reports of irregularities have also surfaced in recent years. In Orange County, authorities charged a woman with multiple felonies after she registered her dog to vote and cast ballots in the animal’s name in at least two elections, with one ballot reportedly counted. Social media videos and local reports have circulated showing apparent attempts to register voters at empty parking lots and other questionable locations. There have also been allegations of individuals, including some experiencing homelessness, being offered compensation in connection with voting activities. While not every claim has been fully verified in court, they have added to growing public skepticism about the current system’s safeguards.

These developments stand in contrast to practices in other countries. France relies primarily on paper ballots for its elections. India, with over a billion people, typically completes its vote counting within roughly a day. Such examples have led some observers to question why California, often described as a technologically advanced state, requires significantly more time and relies heavily on mail voting and electronic systems.

Questions about voting machine security have persisted as well. Demonstrations at hacker conferences, including events like DEFCON, have shown that replicas of certain voting machines can be compromised relatively quickly, including in some cases by participants as young as children. While election officials maintain that actual deployed systems include safeguards and are not connected to the internet in ways that would allow remote attacks, these public demonstrations have fueled debate over whether the technology is as secure as officials claim, especially given the high stakes of statewide elections.

The Shasta County lawsuit also highlights a tension in how state officials discuss democracy. Bonta and Governor Gavin Newsom have frequently insisted their priority is the defense of democracy. However, Measure B was placed on the ballot through the initiative process and approved by a majority of Shasta County voters. The state’s effort to prevent its implementation raises questions about whether local democratic outcomes are being overridden when they conflict with Sacramento’s preferred policies.

Shasta County officials have indicated they expected legal pushback. The lawsuit seeks a ruling by late August to provide clarity ahead of the November general election.

As the case moves forward, it is likely to intensify debates over election administration, local control, and public confidence in the voting process across California.